This was a continuation of the November 3, 1988 meeting; therefore, the motion to adopt
the mission statement was still on the floor. (For a copy of the mission statement handout
see Appendix E of the Faculty Council Minutes of 11/3/88).

Professor Ken Smith discussed paragraph four, sentence three. He noted that the English
Department has seventeen full-time faculty, four one-half time faculty and twenty-two
adjuncts. The adjuncts teach mostly freshmen courses and some do not have master's
degrees. He believes this sentence in the mission statement is misleading the public.
Graduate students are frequently enthusiastic and loyal to the institution. The adjuncts
frequently teach two classes at Chattanooga State, two classes somewhere else and two
classes for us in their attempt to make a living. Why are they perceived as more effective
than graduate teaching assistants? Professor Marcia Noe agreed with Professor Smith. The
English Department depends heavily on ephemeral part-time teachers. Professor David Wiley
pointed out that the sentence in question seems to foreclose the future. It implies that
graduate students aren't so good. With logical development of graduate programs at UTC, we
may want to utilize graduate teaching assistants in the future. Professor Eric Schonblom
said that some of these arguments were voiced in the Committee. The sentence is an
affirmation of current policy. The problem of inept adjuncts in certain classes is not a
mission problem, but rather a management one. We do not want to cast aspersions on
adjuncts by linking them with graduate students. The fraction of classes at this
institution taught by full-time faculty is far larger than at Knoxville. This sentence
represents a compromise of the Committee's views. Professor Wiley asked if we were
discussing and taking notes or if we were suggesting different language and deletions.
President Pringle said this was up to the will of the Council. We are advising the
Chancellor who will receive the minutes of both this meeting and the previous one.

Professor Larry Ingle expressed interest in the subtitle of this document. Is it
rhetoric? What kind of change did the authors have in mind? Professor Schonblom said it
was the Committee's attempt to come up with one sentence that would describe this campus.
He reported attending a meeting in Nashville two years ago at which a long-time member of
the Board of Trustees stood up and said, "Knoxville is...," Martin is..."
and "Chattanooga is...a lot like Martin." This sentence is an attempt to
represent our campus as distinctly different. Professor Ingle asked if the change referred
to was economic and cultural. Professor Schonblom said yes. Professor Ingle asked if
political change was included. Professor Schonblom asked him to define political change.
Professor Ingle said in the `60's a political change was sought in the community. Would
UTC be a catalyst for that? Professor Schonblom said yes that this was one function of an
educator. Professor Wiley said he was bothered by the word, "catalyst" because a
catalyst takes no active part in a reaction. It doesn't change. He was also bothered by
the fact that this is so similar to the motto of the Helen D. and Charles MacArthur
Foundation. The University should be something that does change. Perhaps
"exfoliation" would be better.

Professor Nick Honerkamp returned to the graduate student issue. The sentence does not
preclude the use of graduate assistants as teachers in the future because it is not
mentioned in the "bullets." It is the "bullets" that speak to the
future. It may seem disingenuous, but it is stating the case as it exists now. Professor
Jim Hiestand asked whether or not this document, after all this work and debate, will be
binding. President Pringle said the document describes the current state of things and
does not preclude future changes. Chancellor Obear said the document will be taken
seriously in terms of the boundaries and constraints on the role and scope of the campus.
It does not specify the details of how we are to carry out our responsibilities. The
document is intended to be in effect for the next five years. Professor Noe moved to amend
the motion to adopt the mission statement by deleting the third sentence of paragraph
four. Professor Felicia Sturzer seconded. Professor Honerkamp said this sentence was not
limiting. Professor Schonblom said it was a true description of our classes. Professor Ken
Smith asked if it is true, when we don't know what percentage of classes are taught by
full-time faculty. Professor Schonblom said this was not what the sentence was addressing.
Professor Sturzer said the sentence has a negative connotation whether or not it limits
the future. Associate Provost Marvin Ernst would prefer we say what we are committed to,
not what we are against. We are committed to having full-time faculty maintain continued
and in-depth interaction with students at all levels. A student commented (The Secretary
regrets that we failed to have the students identify themselves by name and so they will
be referred to in the minutes simply as students.) that he had been at Sewanee for a year
and a half and was now majoring in history here. He has always had full-time professors
teach his classes and the classes have been rather small. Professor Ken Smith reiterated
that the English Department has twenty-two adjuncts. Professor Betsy Darken said the
sentence was misleading as stated. We need more courses taught by full-time faculty. A
student suggested the insertion of "primarily" to be more ambiguous. Professor
Bruce Hutchinson said that the public and students were not used to the nuances between
faculty and adjunct faculty. He believes the sentence is misleading.

The amendment passed by a vote of 13:6:0.

Professor Darken then questioned the last sentence in paragraph four. She pointed out
some of our classes are large. She moved that small classes be deleted and that the
Chancellor come up with a more accurate phrasing of the situation here. Professor Noe
seconded. Professor Printz asked for a clarification. If we leave the sentence in, does
this mean we are more likely to do it? Are we describing what we do or what we would like
to do? She is particularly concerned about "personalized advising" which she
believes we are not doing now. President Pringle felt that having the sentence in the
mission statement would provide some leverage for the faculty and Council. Professor Wiley
said we could use it as a barb to irritate the Chancellor. If it is a goal, it should be
identified as such; it ought to be a "bullet." A student commented that he was a
geology major and some of his classes were quite small. Professor Darken reiterated that
we do have some large classes and that this is really not debatable. The present tense of
the sentence implies current status and is therefore, incorrect. Professor Honerkamp said
the purpose of the document is to distance ourselves from others. It is a political
document and the sentence is generally true on a comparative basis. He does feel that
"a small class" needs to be defined. Professor Ken Smith said 100+ is big by any
definition. President Pringle said he thought classes of this size were an exception.
Professor Wiley said he regularly teaches classes of sixty to seventy. Professor Printz
said that two or three years ago she did a mini-study on this and there was only one
science course on this campus available to freshmen that had sixty or less. Many
"D" courses, especially in fine arts, had over sixty, too. She believes it is
better now. A student said that the large courses are primarily general education; many
major courses are small. President Pringle said general education courses make up about
one-third of all courses offered. Another student said he had completed 128 hours and had
had only two classes with more than fifty. Another student asked that we avoid personal
experience comments as largely irrelevant. Professor Jack Thompson pointed out that
"small" is relative. A science course at UTC of one hundred is still small
compared to a class of one-hundred and fifty or two hundred at UTK. Professor Schonblom
said the laboratory parts of those science courses are usually much smaller. Professor
Bruce Hutchinson said we need to be careful. We have numerous 30+ classes in the upper
level business courses. Therefore, he believes small is different depending on the level
(freshman vs. junior/senior) being referenced. Associate Provost Ernst said many graduate
classes were larger than thirty. A student suggested we be ambiguous, i.e., not claim all
classes are small. Professor Schonblom noted the Committee had gone through four years of
mission statements. A principal defect in them was that in order to cover everything, they
added so many modifiers that there was no content left. He would rather be wrong in single
instances and right in the majority of cases than throw in an ambiguous adverb and leave
the reader unable to determine what is meant.

The amendment failed by a vote of 7:13:0.

Professor Wiley then called attention to the "Guidelines and Processes for the
Development of Mission Statements," the first statement. He noted that the contrast
between regional and comprehensive was new to him. He believes this is not addressed in
our mission statement. It does say we are "an emerging metropolitan university"
which suggests we are regional. He said we are comprehensive in the sense the AAUP uses;
i.e., having diverse baccalaureate programs including first professional, but not engaging
in doctoral level education. We need to find out what THEC means by comprehensive. We need
to say we are more than an emerging metropolitan university. We attract people from a
wider region. To expand our horizons beyond our metropolitan circle is part of our
mission. He wondered why the statement doesn't address more of the issues posed in the
Guidelines. We are emerging a lot more than Martin and need to be clearly delineated.

Professor Printz asked about the extensive schedule of night courses. She thinks only
the professional areas have night classes. What about Arts and Sciences? Professor
Schonblom said this was raised in the Committee and the sentence represents a compromise.

Associate Provost Ernst asked why the specialist degree was not mentioned. Professor
Schonblom said it was implied and not included due to lack of space.

Professor Sturzer asked what the University will do to achieve bullets one and six.
Professor Schonblom said the Better Schools unit requirements will result in
better-prepared students. ACT scores are increasing for entering students. We will improve
advising deficiencies. Professor Ron Smith asked how this would be measured for exiting
students. Professor Schonblom said we would use all the current means, plus any new ones
we could think of.

Professor Honerkamp moved the memo from David Chalker, SGA President (See Appendix A).
He thought it ought to be a "bullet." Professor Ingle seconded. "Over the
next five years, the University will" was removed by common agreement so that the
proposed "bullet" would read like the others. Chancellor Obear said he did not
object to the thought behind the amendment. It is an appropriate idea to be incorporated
in a University statement to follow the mission statement. It is inappropriate for the
mission statement which has diligently avoided mentioning resource needs. President
Pringle said that the Committee would have agreed with the Chancellor. Mr. Chalker said
that something as fundamental as a library is different. It is not endorsing a particular
department or philosophy of education. The library is the heart of the campus. It is a
laboratory for everyone involved with the University. It needs to be in there. Chancellor
Obear said it is no more basic than appropriate access to other instructional equipment,
than faculty salaries, than facilities in which instruction is carried out, etc. We could
go on and on. Resource issues seem not to belong in this document. Professor Noe spoke for
the amendment and offered a new wording. She believes the library collection is woefully
weak. She worded the "bullet" to read, "To improve research and
instructional opportunities for students and faculty by expanding UTC's library
collection." One of the students pointed out that the library is a selling point to
new students. Professor Jeannette Vallier said that an expanded library would be
necessitated for any new doctoral programs. Mr. Chalker reiterated that the library was
more than a resource--it is fundamental to the functioning of the University. If a
pro-library bullet was a straight jacket for the University, it was one it ought to wear.
Professor Printz commented that at least three of the other bullets were resource issues.
One of the students suggested we put Brian Patten and Jerry Haskew on it and try to
attract big-name librarians from Auburn, etc. Perhaps we could build a community library
here. Chancellor Obear added we could explore joining the Metro-Conference of Libraries.
He said he was not against the library as a goal or against the centrality of it as an
issue. He found the Noe re-wording helpful. He still believes that resource shortfalls are
not part of the mission. The Noe re-wording was accepted as a friendly substitution for
the amendment. Professor Schonblom said the primacy of the library and our commitment to
it is a given underlying the entire mission statement. Mr. Chalker said certain things
should be a given in regards to the library, but they have not been in the past. This is a
way to make sure a top-notch, prestigious library is right up there with doctoral programs
and anything else the University decides to do in the next five years. This covers so
much. This has passed the SGA Executive Committee and they believe it will improve the
quality of the University today and will increase the value of UTC diplomas ten years down
the road by increasing the quality of the University.

The amendment as re-worded passed by a vote of 19:1:0. Professor Ingle commended the
students for their interest. Dean Joe Jackson said he was impressed with these students
and appreciated their support of the library.

Professor Ingle asked if the final version of the mission statement will speak for the
Chancellor and administration alone or for the entire UTC community. Chancellor Obear said
it would be presented as a document to which all University constituencies have had an
opportunity to contribute and perfect. It will be a statement of all the University.

Professor Printz asked about the Guidelines statement concerning plans to expand or
reduce instructional sites and their resources. She wondered if UTC intended to stay the
same. Chancellor Obear said he raised the same question. Professor Schonblom said we do
plan to stay the same.

Professor Wiley had a question about the "Process" section of the Guidelines.
He was told that the timetable was moved ahead by THEC. The mission statement will at some
time come back to the campus. When exactly the Board of Trustees would deal with it is
uncertain. The Chancellor said it was not at all clear that the references to doctoral
programs will be allowed to stand.

Professor Printz asked if the Chancellor would clean up the service component.
Chancellor Obear said he had a personal commitment to do so. President Pringle said he
hoped it would speak to something other than elected public office.

Associate Provost Jane Harbaugh said she thought all omission of developmental studies
in the document might be a tactical error. She asked what language veiled that area in the
statement. Professor Schonblom said it was omitted. There is a statement that we will
attempt to improve academic quality and implicit in that is the expectation of some
reduction in developmental studies. We hope that the need for developmental programs will
decline as the quality of incoming students rises. Professor Betsy Darken stated
forcefully her belief that the developmental programs do improve students' academic
performance.